Homosexuality

[sabrage]

Again: homosexuality and pederasty are two entirely different beasts (to use a cruel term) and the Bible is much more clear about the latter.

[mjmjr25]

^Quickly, as i'm off to bed. (sabrage snuck one in, the arrow is pointing at a post 2 posts and 1 page back )

It is hoped (could used the word "believed" here as well) that our Pastors are speaking the word of God, and working in and through Christ.

At grave risk of going horribly off-topic, It is also understood by Christians that there are Demons at play all around us, Optmus. There are horrible Demons and there are also sinful men. They cloak themselves in the Cloth of God and do horrible things in his name. Those men have nothing to do with the track of this thread though, no offense.

It would be akin to, "Well, Sammy Sosa used steroids. You like Baseball. Baseball players are all bad because a few used steroids. If you say baseball is good, how can you do that if some of them cheat?" Baseball is still a great game with many great players. Horrible analogy, hopefully the point is there somewhere there. Like I said, my wife really wants to get to our show.

@Dave - i'll reply to yr post tomorrow with greater detail.

If your comment was an attempt to get me to respond to a particular post, I would have rather you said, "Mike, ignore the goofy / pointless pics and posts from those who haven't read the thread, come back and give your take on this?"

[dsheinem]

@Dave - i'll reply to yr post tomorrow with greater detail.

I figured a simple "Yes" or "No" as to whether each point is a fair assessment would be sufficient...

[Gamerforlife]

Not the right thread for this, but I don't where else to mention it.

I finished season 1 of the Wire recently, and I just have to say how cool it is that Omar goes against pretty much every gay stereotype I can think of. He's a cool character and one of the best gay characters I've ever seen on television

Anyway, carry on with your discussion. Don't mind me.

[optmusprimenumber]

Again: homosexuality and pederasty are two entirely different beasts (to use a cruel term) and the Bible is much more clear about the latter.

and in regards to substantiating their view points - that can't just be swept under the rug, do you not see my question?... if one can justify their disapproval of homosexuality with biblical teachings, and literal evil finds it's way into the midst of their sermons and preaches the bible and the ways of god and being christlike, somehow there must be a pinhole in their spiritual balloon, the balloon that has been blown up every mass in their favorite house of god, just to make an illustrative analogy... and if all that can happen (even without the pinhole) do they still justify disapproval of homosexuality because the bible says so? if the safest place known to your soul is the altar on which a pedophile stands, how is one so compelled to think their reason to disapprove of homosexuality is such a reason any more?

don't get me wrong.. i was brought up roman catholic until i was 13 or so, spent many years as an atheist, ended up educating myself on many spiritual practices the world around around 23-26, am basically agnostic at this point - i've come to accept the universe as my one god (astro physicists have started to say that the universe is looking like one big thought more than anything else), i've come to fully understand what "faith" means to someone and i'm not against that... but one's faith can be rocked, and as i said before, that pedophile shit has to be a doozey, and again i ask, does one still find reasons to disapprove of homosexuality - of all things - in their faith?

[DinnerX]

See, I didn't think that either Popo's line of argument or mine about the practical considerations of having to live in a governed society were really honestly addressed so much as dismissed at the moment of departure from the thread. Yeah, the previous posts referencing Seinfeld and the like are silly tangents, but I haven't seen a good answer to the question of why someone's personal religious beliefs about my individual soul should give them the power to create laws that discriminate against behavior that effects only me and like-minded people.

I do not see basing a law on unprovable religion as different from basing a law on unprovable secular ideals. People will stick up for their particular secular beliefs and try to put them into the government. Numerous revolutions have begun over economic policy alone. I view myself as simply doing what everyone else does when I try to ensure government policies agree with my beliefs or, at least, aren't contrary to them.

[o.pwuaioc]

It would be akin to, "Well, Sammy Sosa used steroids. You like Baseball. Baseball players are all bad because a few used steroids. If you say baseball is good, how can you do that if some of them cheat?" Baseball is still a great game with many great players. Horrible analogy, hopefully the point is there somewhere there. Like I said, my wife really wants to get to our show.

Matthew 7:17 Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.

I do not see basing a law on unprovable religion as different from basing a law on unprovable secular ideals.

Who says the latter are unprovable?

[optmusprimenumber]

steroids are so completely less evil, i see what your driving at, but it's not quite a balanced comparison.

as far as the fruit tree goes, and I say this kindly and inquisitively, the tree produces many virtuous fruit (its followers), then it is discovered that the tree also has been bearing horrible fruit, the tree is cut down, it is remembered for it's fruit, which in this case is an explicit representation of duality.. all the good fruit feels like good fruit, the bad fruit is condemned, end of story?

...

like i said, it all bugs me out, and i thought we're here to discuss these things... i guess a better analogy would be - my michilin tire blows out apparently without any punctures or tears so i no longer buy michilin tires. and michilin tires said being gay is wrong. but after they proved they couldn't even be a proper tire i'm not sure they have anything worthwhile to say about being gay. and according to them where they learned how to be a tire is the same place they learned that gay is wrong. and now i have my doubts that that place has given me any reason to disapprove of gay, because i was there to learn about being a tire anyway. not that i'm calling religious folks "tires" i hope you understand

[DinnerX]

I do not see basing a law on unprovable religion as different from basing a law on unprovable secular ideals.

Who says the latter are unprovable?

An ideal is inherently unprovable. An ideal says "this is the best." That's not a provable statement. Also, if secular ideals were provable there wouldn't be so many secular ideals. One man believes in communism, the other believes in capitalism and so on.

Good to see you around o.pwuaioc by the way. I was afraid you'd left for a bit there.

[dsheinem]

People will sick up for their particular secular beliefs and try to put them into the government...I view myself as simply doing what everyone else does when I try to ensure government policies agree with my beliefs or, at least, aren't contrary to them.

This isn't always true. For example, I believe that churches should be taxed and that people should be forced to demonstrate a basic understanding of current events before being allowed to vote, but I would never actively pursue either (through vote, lobbying, etc.) since those principles aren't consistent with greater principles of fairness, equity, separation of church and state, etc.

It isn't true for Christians either, as divorce is certainly legal but unbiblical, yet it certainly isn't lobbied against in any way. Hell, there are a whole host of "sins" that don't get the "special treatment" that same-sex marriage does.